State v. Gibney’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably State v. Desautels (2006), State v. Billy Joe Putnam (2015)
42 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Giglio v. United States · Burks v. United States · California v. Trombetta
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“By modifying evidence, we mean exculpatory evidence introduced by defendant, such as countervailing testimony.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Youngblood is both too broad and too narrow. It is too broad because it would require the imposition of sanctions even though a defendant has demonstrated no prejudice from the lost evidence. It is too narrow because it limits due process violations to only those cases in which a defendant can demonstrate bad faith, even though the negligent loss of evidence may critically prejudice a defendant. [2]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Pena v. State“irrespective of the evidence adduced by the defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Martin
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.